Since this one was a local issue, here's the synopsis:
in the 2002 NJ Senate Race, ethically clouded incumbent
Democratic senator Robert Torricelli announced a month
prior to the election that he was withdrawing from his
re-election race, assumed by almost all due to overwhelming
drops in the polls, largely due to the constant pressure
from his Republican opponent Doug Forrester who made
near-daily reminders of Torricelli's ethical issues
in his press statements.

The running gag being that the Republican opponent's
name was actually "Doug NotTorricelli,"
it came as no suprise that the GOP cried foul
when the NJ-DNC announced that only 31 days before
the election the now-vacant ticket would be filled
by former Senator (and ridiculously popular) Frank
Lautenberg.

Suing to prevent the name change on the ballots, the
GOP legally filed that the deadline to change candidates
had passed- indeed it had, yet essentially the Republicans
were suing to demand that a candidate who publicly announced
his refusal to run for office be listed as the Democratic
candidate.

The irony of all this was noted by both myself
and others
when it was discovered that not only had the GOP used
similar arguments to put Forrester on their ticket earlier
in the year, but in fact used nearly the exact same
legal precedent to do so that they were now challenging.

The State Court ruled in favor of the whole "best
for Democracy" angle and Lautenberg, expectedly,
won the Senate race, but not before ending what
many considered the most ridiculous and corrupt
political battle in state history. And for New
Jersey, that means a lot.